header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Trauma

SHOULD HIP FRACTURE BE OPERATED ONLY BY HIP UNIT SURGEONS IN ORDER TO IMPROVE RATES OF SURGICAL SITE INFECTION?

European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (EFORT) - 12th Congress



Abstract

Introduction

Hip fracture is a worldwide problem, not only as far as epidemiology is concerned but also regarding economical issues. Surgery is the current standard treatment. However owing to age, and patients co-morbidities complications are common. Surgical site infection is directly related to operative procedure, and surgeons' experience may be very important when making plans for outcome improvement. In this paper we study the role of hip surgeons versus general orthopaedic surgeons in relation to postoperative site infection. Operative hypothesis determines that hip surgeons have less infection rates than general orthopaedic surgeons. Null hypothesis that infection rates are rather the same.

Material and Methods

In a prospective controlled cohort study 820 patients presenting with a hip fracture were randomizelly operated on by a group of orthopaedic surgeons of the same Hospital Department. Patients were then classified according to surgeons adscription either to a Hip Unit (Group A=215 cases) or not (Group B=605). Variables studied included age, gender, treatment (osteosynthesis or joint replacement), co-morbidities (according to Charlson, s index), and infection rate. Fisher, and Ranksum statistical tests, and simple and multiple logistic regression, for univariate and multivariate, analysis was performed.

Results

237 (28,93 %) patients were male, and 583 (71,06 %) females. Mean age for both groups was 77,58 years (r=16−105; group A=78, group B=81). 215 patients were included in group A, and 605 in group B. 534 (65.12%) underwent an osteosynthesis, and 272 (33,17%) a joint replacement. 14 patients were not operated. Both groups were homogeneous regarding gender, surgical technique, Charlson's index, and functional outcome (Fisher test p=0,777). 17 patients (2,073%) sustained a surgical site infection (group A=7 cases out of 215 [3,27%], and group B=10 cases out of 605 [1,65%]). Multivariate logistic regression showed that there was no relation between gender, surgical site infection, Charlson index, surgical technique, or groups (A or B). Only age was a determinant factor (Raksum test p=0,003; OR 95% CI=1,08, p=0,005).

Conclusion

Since there are no differences in the outcomes between surgeons dedicated to a Hip Unit and general orthopaedic surgeons as far as postoperative surgical site infection is concerned, delaying operative treatment for hip fracture or creating a special Unit for that is unworthy. Only age appears as a significant variable.